Analysis of pharmacoeconomic value of sitagliptin in the treatment of diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes mellitus is a chronic metabolic disease which has an adverse impact on the quality of patient's life, so patients often need to receive treatment for a long time. Selection of medications with high therapeutics effects and low cost is very important for patients to take medicine for a longer period of time. Sitagliptin is a drug which is widely used in clinics and can effectively control blood glucose level. This article explores the pharmacoeconomic value of Sitagliptin in the treatment of diabetes mellitus. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 100 patients with diabetes mellitus treated were recruited in this study. The patients were randomly divided into 4 groups with 25 cases in each group. Patients in group A were treated with pioglitazone, group B with Sitagliptin, group C with metformin and group D with glimepiride. The cost of the drugs, the treatment results and adverse effects were compared. RESULTS: Compared with group A, C and D, the cost-effectiveness ratio of group B was low (p<0.05), and the therapeutic effect was high (p<0.05). In addition, the incidence of adverse reactions in group B was lower than that in group A, C and D (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in the levels of FPG, 2hPG and HbAlc in patients among the four groups before treatment (p>0.05). After treatment, the levels of FPG, 2hPG and HbAlc in group B were significantly lower than those in groups A, C and D (p<0.05). Finally, there was no significant difference in waist circumference and BMI among the four groups before treatment (p>0.05). After treatment, the waist circumference and BMI in group B were lower than those in groups A, C and D (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The application of Sitagliptin in the treatment of diabetic patients can effectively enhance the therapeutic effect. The cost effectiveness is satisfactory, and the blood glucose level can be maintained at a stable state.

Pioglitazone: The forgotten, cost-effective cardioprotective drug for type 2 diabetes.

Type 2 diabetes individuals are at high risk for macrovascular complications: myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular mortality. Recent cardiovascular outcome trials have demonstrated that agents in two antidiabetic classes (SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists) reduce major adverse cardiovascular events. However, there is strong evidence that an older and now generically available medication, the thiazolidinedione, pioglitazone, can retard the atherosclerotic process (PERISCOPE and Chicago) and reduce cardiovascular events in large randomized prospective cardiovascular outcome trials (IRIS and PROactive). Pioglitazone is a potent insulin sensitizer, preserves beta-cell function, causes durable reduction in HbA1c, corrects multiple components of metabolic syndrome and improves nonalcoholic fatty liver disease/nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Adverse effects (weight gain, fluid retention, fractures) must be considered, but are diminished with lower doses and are arguably outweighed by these multiple benefits. With healthcare expenses attributable to diabetes increasing rapidly, this cost-effective drug requires reconsideration in the therapeutic armamentarium for the disease.

Weight Reduction and Pioglitazone are Cost-Effective for the Treatment of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Thailand.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated lifetime liver-related clinical outcomes, costs of treatment, and the cost-effectiveness of treatment options for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in Thailand. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis using a lifetime Markov model was conducted among Thai patients with NAFLD, from a societal perspective. Pioglitazone, vitamin E, a weight reduction program, and usual care were investigated, with the outcomes of interest being the number of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cases, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: When compared with usual care, a weight reduction program can prevent cirrhosis and HCC cases by 13.91% (95% credible interval [CrI] 0.97, 20.59) and 2.12% (95% CrI 0.43, 4.56), respectively; pioglitazone can prevent cirrhosis and HCC cases by 9.30% (95% CrI -2.52, 15.24) and 1.42% (95% CrI -0.18, 3.74), respectively; and vitamin E can prevent cirrhosis and HCC cases by 7.32% (95% CrI -4.64, 15.56) and 1.12% (95% CrI -0.81, 3.44), respectively. Estimated incremental life expectancy and incremental QALYs for all treatment options compared with usual care were approximately 0.06 years and 0.07 QALYs, respectively. The lifetime costs of both a weight reduction program and pioglitazone were less than usual care, while vitamin E was $3050 (95% CrI 2354, 3650). The weight reduction program dominated all other treatment options. The probability of being cost-effective in Thailand's willingness-to-pay threshold ($4546/QALY gained) was 76% for the weight reduction program, 22% for pioglitazone, 2% for usual care, and 0% for vitamin E. CONCLUSIONS: A weight reduction program can prevent cirrhosis and HCC occurrences, and dominates all other treatment options. Pioglitazone and vitamin E demonstrated a trend towards decreasing the number of cirrhosis and HCC cases.